the boldest deeds in surgery. Here, amongst ourselves, Home, Cline, Blizard, Abernethy, Cooper, had passed away, or well-nigh faded from the scene. The same might be said of Todd and Colles in Dublin. Crampton, Carmichael, and Cusack worthily held the highest places in that city; and Brodie, Travers, Wardrop, Guthrie, Anthony White, Key, Stanley, Green, and others yet alive, whose names and deeds inspire veneration, held sway in the great metropolis. In Glasgow, John Burns laboured, I may say alone, in a field which had been previously occupied by himself and his worthy brother Allan. In Edinburgh, the reputation of the Monros gave high character to the anatomical and pathological aspect of surgery, and the family reputation was maintained by the third of the name. The brilliancy of John Bell had in the early part of the century given great éclat to the school (which was enhanced by his brother Charles, whose name may be honourably included amongst the worthies of London, at the time I speak of), and the solid worth of Benjamin Bell had given a high character to Edinburgh surgery.

About this date the field of surgical practice in the northern metropolis was held by gentlemen of high social and professional stamp, but they were neither professed teachers nor long-experienced hospitalsurgeons. Each had served a few years only as full surgeon in the Royal Infirmary. One (Mr Wishart) had published translations of Scarpa's works on Aneurism and on Hernia, but others were unknown to more than local fame. From this list I may bring out and except

the name of Russell, the author of an original and still standard work on Necrosis, and at that time revered as a surviving pupil of John Hunter. He was, moreover, the first Professor of Clinical Surgery, and the only one bearing such a title in the United Kingdom. His position as a model surgeon was, however, by no means prominent, and the "pure" surgery of Edinburgh (as the term goes) was little different from that which might be found in any of the large provincial towns in Britain. There was no chair of surgery in the University. That of the College of Surgeons (which was shortly after abrogated) was held by a clever man, whose health and temperament prevented him taking a foremost rank in practical surgery, and there seemed little hope for a continuance of the great reputation of this school, when suddenly there appeared on the scene three men, whose labours have added substantially to the renown of the Scotch school, and whose names will be imperishably associated with the history of British surgery. These men were, John Lizars, Robert Liston, and James Syme. I trust that I may be pardoned for making pointed allusion to these surgeons, but as it was from them that I chiefly gathered many of my own early views in surgery, I should not wish this opportunity to pass without giving them that honourable mention which, in my opinion, they richly deserve.

Mr Syme still lives in active manhood, with a worldwide reputation second to none amongst living surgeons. It is considered unbecoming to say that of one yet active on the scene which may be said in after years.

Modern surgery owes him much, as I shall show in future lectures. Eulogy Eulogy might seem to partake of flattery, and for my present purpose it may be sufficient to state, that at the date referred to, this gentleman evinced all that energy of character and aptitude for clinical teaching and for practice for which he has since become so distinguished.

Mr Liston's fame at this date, particularly as an operator, was well-nigh as great as at any period of his comparatively short but brilliant career. In after years his soundness as a pathologist became more conspicuous; and the numerous valuable preparations in the museum of this College, which formed part of his collection, bear ample testimony to the greatness of his doings in practical surgery. Both he and Mr Syme had already published those remarkable essays on Amputation which, with the example set by their practice, went far to give that development to the flap operation since attained. Many circumstances contributed to give Mr Liston early fame in Scotland. A well-developed frame, a broad forehead, a strongly marked, handsome countenance, indicative of great courage and decision, and an eye of piercing brilliancy and great expression, at once impressed those who sought his aid with a conviction of his powers. With these were associated a hand alike marvellous for its great size, its silent expressiveness, its vigorous firmness, its lightness, and its dexterity. It was aptly said of it by a distinguished lay contemporary and admirer, the late Lord Robertson-" If hard as iron and true as

steel in the theatre of operation, it is soft as thistledown when applied to the throbbing pulse or aching brow." The remembrance of that hand is still fresh on my memory.

Some early operations of great magnitude and comparative novelty, aided by a certain amount of jealous opposition which merit is sure to call forth, brought Mr Liston's fame impressively before the public; and among his achievements may be mentioned the successful removal of a scrotal tumour of more than forty pounds' weight, the first operation of the kind ever performed in this country,-and successful ligature of the subclavian, which had been essayed in vain by Ramsden and others in Britain.

When personal recollections have passed away, there will remain much to associate Mr Liston's name with surgery, but the greatest features of his teaching powers will be forgotten. With less than average facility of speech, he had a manner in all that he did before his pupils that produced the deepest impression; and there was a style in his operations which has had more influence in this department among a large number of pupils than has been produced, in as far as I can make out, by any other man in the history of surgery. Only those who have seen him can thoroughly appreciate what I

now say.

Of Mr Lizars there is now probably less known than of the two gentlemen just referred to; but his fame. was great at the time. His folio work on Anatomy, with which he incorporated most of his views on opera

very

tive surgery, had contributed largely to his reputation. Initiated to the profession by John Bell, to whom he served a pupilage, he seemed to have imbibed some of the characteristics of that great surgeon. He was a successful teacher both of anatomy and surgery, an excellent pathologist, a brilliant and daring operator. His name will ever remain associated with the early history of modern operations on the upper jaw. He was the only man in Scotland who had placed a ligature on the innominata. The operation was unsuccessful; but it went far to prove, what was then not so well recognised as now, that secondary hæmorrhage in such cases is more likely to come from the distal than from the proximal end of a tied vessel. He was the second to perform ovariotomy, and its practical originator in Britain. Like many pioneers in art and science, he was for this assailed by a certain amount of ridicule associated with vigorous opposition, and thus was thrown into abeyance an operation which, thirty years later, has produced as much excitement as has been associated with the early history of any great surgical proceeding. Whatever may be the fate of ovariotomy, the name of John Lizars must always remain associated with it.

I may be wrong, but the impression is strong on my mind, that an impulse to the more accurate study of surgical anatomy arose coeval with the development of the Hunterian operation. Before I knew the profession, all the great arteries had been tied, from the superficial femoral to the abdominal aorta and innominata, on the principles of our great surgical philosopher. The surgical